Ethics and Rights

¶ … right, a legal right, a moral right, a human right. How are they related? Rights are privileges or entitlements to perform particular actions, or to be in particular state/situations; or privileges/entitlements to carry out certain actions or be in particular states. Rights are the cornerstone of the modern comprehension of what actions are allowed or permissible and which institutions are fair and just. Rights structure the content of laws, the form of governments, and shape morality as it is currently viewed (Wenar, 2005).

A legal right Legal rights are rights which exist under the constitutions and laws of legal systems or by the virtue of decisions by the appropriate legal authorities (Campbell, 2001). A human right Human rights have been defined in many circles as essential moral guarantees that people and cultures in all countries apparently have for the simple reason that they are human beings. Thus human rights are often held to be universal, due to the fact that all peoples should enjoy them.

Human rights are also regarded as independent in the sense that they exist as standards of criticism and justification, whether they are acknowledged and implemented by officials and legal systems of a country (Nickel, 1987). A moral right Rights that a creator of copyrighted work has with regards to ownerships and control of the said work, as recognized and enforced by some common and civil law jurisdictions (What are moral rights? definition and meaning, n.d.).

It is widely thought that social justice can only be achieved when individuals in a society enjoy human rights, that is, they have and do make moral claims and can also, by virtue of being human beings, make legal claims against other people/institutions for what morally belongs to them (Morality, n.d.). 2. What three (3) features define a moral right? Morality is all about a system of conduct and behaviors in terms of the standards of being right or wrong.

The phrase moral right infers the following: (1) moral standards, in terms of behavior; (2) moral responsibility, of course with regards to our conscience as people; and (3) a moral identity, the capability of choosing a right or wrong action (Morality, n.d.). 3. How do we know that people have rights? What is the basis of the moral rights according to a utilitarian view? According to Immanuel Kant? Every individual is entitled to particular fundamental rights, which cannot be taken away from them by virtue of being human.

These are known as "human rights" rather than a privilege (which can be withdrawn at the whim of another person). They are "rights" because they are actions or things that an individual is allowed to do, to have or to be. These rights exist for the protection against individuals who might want to hurt or harm others. They are also there to encourage harmony between people and also to encourage people to live in peace with each other (WHAT ARE HUMAN RIGHTS? Human Rights Defined, n.d).

A "utilitarian" argument, basically suggests that people have to do something since it will result in more total happiness that doing any other action would. Act utilitarianism (AU), is a popular moral theory that argues that the morally right action (the act that everyone has a moral duty to do), is the one that will most likely maximize "utility" (well-being, happiness, welfare).

A "utilitarian" argument is all about the suggestion that individuals should do some actions because of its "good consequences" or on the other hand not to perform some actions because of its "bad consequences," this argument suggests that good or bad consequences need not be restricted to what increases or reduces happiness but also other actions or things that have no positive or negative intrinsic value attached to them by a strict utilitarian theory.

Kantian ethics are anchored on what is referred to as Categorical Imperative, referred to as the supreme principle of morality by Immanuel Kant .Kant argued that there are several different ways of defining the Categorical Imperative. The first way is the Universal Law Formula, which states that we should only act on principles that we want to be universal law that applies to each and everyone. The idea here is that when individuals act immorally, they want everyone else to obey or follow the "rules" but with exceptions for themselves.

Another way of defining the Categorical Imperative that we will focus on this paper is through the Principle of Humanity. It states that when we act we must always treat all "people" (including ourselves) as "ends" and never as "means" (Utilitarianism, Kantian Ethics, Natural Rights Theories, and Religious Ethics, n.d.) 4. Fully discuss the idea that human beings have a "natural right" to liberty and a "natural right" to private property, as claimed by John Locke (1632-1704).

John Locke (1632-1704), who was an influential English philosopher, is credited with coming up with the idea that all human beings have the inborn right to liberty and a natural right to own private property.

Locke was of the argument that if governments did not exist, human beings would be in a "state of nature." In this particular state each individual would be the political equivalent of all the others and would ideally be free from any limitations or constraints other than the law of nature; the moral principles given to us by God and the each individual can discover these laws by utilizing his God-given reasoning ability.

Therefore, as suggested by Locke, the law of nature makes us understand that we have natural right to liberty (CHAPTER THREE: The Market and Business, n.d.). According to Locke men are by nature free and before God all men are equal to justify the reasoning that legitimate political government is a social contract in which individuals in a state of nature freely and conditionally transfer some of their rights to a government so as to ensure the comfortable and stable enjoyment of their liberty, lives and property (Tuckness, 2005).

The authority or power of government is however restricted, extending just as far enough to protect these essential rights. Locke's opinions on ownership of property have been very influential in the United States. The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution even quotes John Locke directly. The amendment is based on the idea that the government does not give property, rather nature does. The role of the government is just to protect these property rights (CHAPTER THREE: The Market and Business,.